Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41019502›Full record

ArticleJournal of bone oncology2025

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spine and non-spine bone metastases in prostate carcinoma - a multicenter cohort analysis.

Franziska Nägler, Isabell Seiler, Sebastian Schäfer, Johannes Meents, Fabian Lohaus, Arne Grün, Olaf Wittenstein, Kenneth Klischies, Julia Remmele, Alexander Rühle and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bone oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Individualized radiotherapy of bone metastases from prostate cancer: time trends and 5-year survival results.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Franziska NäglerDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Isabell SeilerDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Sebastian SchäferDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Johannes MeentsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
Fabian LohausNational Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), NCT/UCC Dresden, a partnership between DKFZ, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, and Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR), Germany.
Arne GrünDepartment for Radiation Oncology, Charité - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universitaet Berlin, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Germany.
Olaf WittensteinDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Kenneth KlischiesDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Julia RemmeleDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Alexander RühleDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Miriam EcklDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
Oliver BlanckDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Judit Boda-HeggemannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
Frank A GiordanoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.
Christos MoustakisDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Nils H NicolayDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany.
Lena KästnerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Metastases-directed radiotherapy plays an increasing role in oligometastatic prostate cancers (OMPC). Here, we investigated the role of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for spine and non-spine bone metastases (BoM) from prostate cancer in a large real-world multicenter cohort. Material and methods: This multicenter cohort analysis from five tertiary cancer centers included patient data of spine and non-spine BoM irradiated between 2010 and 2024. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), SBRT target volumes and doses, toxicity, and the role of additional systemic therapies were evaluated retrospectively. Results: 231 patients (341 BoM) with median follow-up time of 28.3 months were included. Most common localization were spine (39.3 %), pelvic bone (31.7 %), and ribs (17.9 %). 1- and 5-year PFS for spine BoM were 93.8 % (95 %CI:84.2-97.6 %) and 32.1 % (95 %CI:16.8-44.4 %) and for non-spine BoM 91.7 % (95 %CI:85.1-95.5 %) and 36.6 % (95 %CI:25.8-47.5 %), respectively. 1- and 5-year OS for spine BoM amounted to 94.2 % (95 %CI:85.3-97.8 %) and 69.2 % (95 %CI:50.2-82.2 %) and for non-spine 100 % and 73.3 % (95 %CI:59.1-83.3 %). Older age (p < 0.005) and additional systemic therapies (p = 0.05) were associated with worse OS, older age and larger treatment volumes with worse PFS (p = 0.04). Toxicities were low, with fracture rates of 0.3 % (acute) and 1.2 % (late). Conclusion: Bone SBRT for OMPC is an effective treatment with low toxicity and particularly low fracture rates for both spine and non-spine BoM with no difference in outcome based on the localization. Prospective trials will help to identify the patients benefitting most from this approach and to establish standardized SBRT concepts incorporating systemic treatments.

Indexed as

Bone metastasesMetastasis-directed therapy (MDT)Non-spine metastasesProstate cancerRadiotherapySpine metastasesStereotactic radiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID41019502
PMCPMC12466248

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.